nation suffered by women and girls who are members of ethnic or racial minority groups and/or handicapped. Thus, we in no way wish to detract from the importance of the problem addressed by the programs mentioned above, but rather to suggest that they have failed to directly address sex discrimination. It has been found,

A suc

for example, that education programs for the handicapped use less demanding definitions of "success" for their women clients than for the men they enroll. cessful male graduate is one who is employed and economically self-supporting. For a woman, by contrast, the program is deemed to have succeeded if, after completing it, she is self-supporting, is supported by a husband, or does housekeeping in exchange for support by her parents or others. 3/ The Council's research has identified serious problems of sex bias and sex stereotyping in other education programs supported by Federal formula grants. Therefore, we believe that in order for the needs

of all disadvantaged groups to be met, the problems of sexism in education must be adequately addressed as well.

(A summary comparison of selected Federal programs directed at expanding educational opportunity has been appended to our prepared statement for your information.) It is also important that the unique nature of sex discrimination be recognized by all the legislation attempting to remedy it. As already noted, sex discrimination, bias, and stereotyping occur in even fully "integrated" or coeducational facilities, in employment practices, the treatment of students, and curriculum. In 1972, Title IV of the Civil Rights Act, which provides assistance related to desegregation of public elementary and secondary schools on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, and language deficiencies, was amended to include desegregation by sex. But it was passage of WEEA that first acknowledged that there are limits to the parallels that can be made between race and sex based discrimination. Although in many ways similar

and frequently overlapping, the problems of women are not identical to those of other minorities and require new solutions. The development and implementation of these

3/ Patricia Thomas Cegelka, "Sex Role Stereotyping in Special Education: A Look at Secondary Work Study Programs," Exceptional Children, Vol. 42, No. 6 (March, 1976), pp. 323-328.

solutions will require time and money for research, technical assistance programs and products, training, oversight and related activities for an extended period of time.

The Women's Educational Equity Act Program has been carefully administered to make the most cost-beneficial use of its allocation under the Special Projects Act appropriation. But no amount of focusing on capacity building through the development of model programs and products to meet the needs of institutions on a national basis can disguise the fact that the total funds available simply have not begun to meet the need for assistance in achieving educational equity for both sexes. This was tacitly recognized by Congress and the White House in the appropriation process for the Special Projects Act of the past two years when, for FY 1977, Congress increased the appropriation for WEEA by $1 million above the percentage set-aside without formally amending the Special Projects Act formula; and again when, in FY 1978, the administration recommended level funding or cuts for many education programs but HEW officials testified of WEEA that "it is clear that they cannot accomplish major things without an increase."

The Women's Educational Equity Act was the first piece of Federal legislation enacted with the exclusive purpose of improving educational opportunities for women and girls. It is clear that while the initial results of the Act's existence may already be visible in some of the nation's schools and colleges, in HEW's own Education Division, and even in the mainstreaming efforts of this very Congressional Committee, the unmet need for research and demonstration projects, information dissemination, materials and curriculum development, pre-service and in-service training and other projects designed to promote educational equity for both sexes far outstrips the relatively miniscule funding currently earmarked for these or related purposes in appropriations for WEEA, the Civil Rights Act, the Vocational Education Act, and the National Institute of Education.

It is the Advisory Council's firm belief that in order for WEEA to adequately

fulfill its legislative purpose it must be freed from both the restrictive setaside formula of the Special Projects Act and the uncertainty of the Commissioner's discretionary funding. As you know, under the existing formula, which guarantees WEEA an appropriation of 15 percent of the total annual Special Project Act's appropriation, the consolidated Act would have to be funded for its full $200 million authorization in order for WEEA to be funded at the $30 million level. Yet funding of WEEA at such an increased level within the immediate future will clearly be necessary to support the much needed research, materials development, and dissemination projects aimed at expanding educational equity.

Therefore, if indeed the Special Projects Act was intended to provide "an incubator period" of three years for "programs to respond to newly perceived needs" to become established and prove their value, then the Women's Educational Equity Act is ready now not only to be extended but to be released from the set-aside structure and fashioned not into a discretionary program but into an expanded categorical program with an authorization more nearly proportional to the need for assistance in this area.

Believing that this Committee has an interest in the functioning of the National Advisory Council which it established as part of the Women's Educational Equity Act, I would like to describe briefly the major thrusts of our work to date. For the record, may I submit the most recent annual report, covering Council activities during 1976. This will indicate to you the range of concerns which we have taken up. The Council early recognized that although the special programs and appropriations for women, such as the WEEA, are absolutely vital to break new ground, to develop materials, to evolve techniques and strategies for overcoming sex bias, sex stereotyping and all forms of sex discrimination in education, the pervasive nature and mammoth size of these problems require that the battle against them be waged on every front. Therefore, we have put a major emphasis on "mainstreaming" or attempting to infuse into all aspects of Federally assisted education programs the awareness of and concern about sex bias.

Welfare.

The Council is in the process of preparing a series of reports concerning various aspects of the Education Division of the Department of Health, Education and These reports will update and go well beyond the report prepared in 1972 by an Office of Education task force concerned with sex discrimination in OE programs. The first of this series, which will be transmitted to you in a few weeks, highlights the very limited employment of women in management and policy making positions within the Education Division. The next report covers the impact on girls and women of the disbursement of Education Division program funds, both formula and discretionary. We will also be examining the communications, internal and external, funded by the Education Division in order to ascertain how sex-fair they are. We will be reporting on data collection and its implications for sex equity and we will also issue a report concerning major education legislation and implementing regulations. We hope these reports will prove useful to this Committee as well as to the officials within HEW who have expressed great concern about equality of opportunity and of access for all groups.

In addition to these reports on HEW activities as they affect women, the Council has given particular attention to certain groups and programs. We recognized that the rural population of women and girls has received much less attention, in terms of educational and other needs, than has the urban-suburban population. Therefore,

we held a series of regional consultations in four widely diverse rural areas so that we could meet with and hear from local educators, community activists, and, above all, rural women themselves. The outcome of this effort was this report entitled "Educational Needs of Rural Women and Girls," which we submit for your use. This report has received considerable attention in all parts of the country. We are encouraged by the positive response from organizations and women and are hopeful that it will stimulate increased attention to long-neglected needs.

We appreciate the fact that in FY 1976 the WEEA funded a few projects targeted specifically for the benefit of rural communities. We look forward to reviewing the products of these projects and hope that additional ones will be funded in the

current year's cycle. The Council is convinced that to be successful, these projects, like others aimed at the rural population, must be planned, developed, and implemented in close cooperation with rural women themselves. The time (if it

ever existed) for imposing ideas or projects on an area is long past.

The National Advisory Council has, from its inception,

considered vocational education to be a key area. We were delighted when the Congress enacted Title II of the Education Amendments of 1976 with its strong, clear language intended to overcome the sex stereotyping which has long characterized vocational education. Recognizing the crucial importance of program regulations, the

As a

Council has participated in each stage of this regulation-writing process. citizen's advisory group, the Council thought it useful to share with interested women's organizations around the country background information concerning the Act, the issues, and the hearings and other avenues of public input. We have analyzed the public comments received on some of the issues of special concern to women and are watching closely to determine how responsive the regulations will be when issued. Recognizing the enormous potential of career education for

widening occupational horizons for girls and women, the Council has been following this legislation with close attention. You may recall that our former Chair, Bernice Sandler, testified before this Committee in March on H. R. 7. We not only appreciated your cordial reception of her, but, above all, the fact that the Committee, and subsequently the House, approved a version of H.R. 7 which emphasizes the need to eliminate sex bias and sex stereotyping from the Federally assisted career education Subsequently, we presented testimony before the Senate Committee and are hopeful that the legislation will be enacted with language similar to that of the Ilouse version.

program.

The Women's Educational Equity Act directed the Commissioner to prepare and submit to the Council a "national comprehensive review of sex discrimination in education." This was prepared in the form of three reports, covering professional employront, access to postsecondary education, and guidance and counseling. The Council